Fashion Sakala.

Jim Prideaux said:
I didn’t.

They aren’t really relevant to my point though. He was also our best player v Celtic in January.
Click to expand...
He did have a good game January but we have to be ruthless this summer.

All opinions but we’re winning nothing with Sakala in the starting XI. The goals and assists may get us a decent fee where we can invest in a better player.

I don’t think he belongs on the bench either if we manage to improve the footballing ability across the whole squad this summer.
 
Leo_Ger said:
Is 20 goals and 15 assists in 87 appearances for us now.

I think we could replace that tbh.
Click to expand...
How many minutes though?

If we can, great. We’d probably make a healthy profit too, considering Burnley were willing to pay £4m last summer.

I’m just saying getting rid of him wouldn’t be my first port of call :))
 
Todd said:
He did have a good game January but we have to be ruthless this summer.

All opinions but we’re winning nothing with Sakala in the starting XI. The goals and assists may get us a decent fee where we can invest in a better player.

I don’t think he belongs on the bench either if we manage to improve the footballing ability across the whole squad this summer.
Click to expand...
That’s fair enough.

On the point I’ve boldened: I’ve been thinking recently we may need to sacrifice some pure ‘footballing ability’ in favour of players that are effective domestically.

That’s if we want to win domestic trophies, rather than have good runs in Europe. Obviously you’d prefer both, but I’ve just been thinking recently about the contrast between us and Celtic in recent years.

That’s for another thread though.
 
Jim Prideaux said:
That’s fair enough.

On the point I’ve boldened: I’ve been thinking recently we may need to sacrifice some pure ‘footballing ability’ in favour of players that are effective domestically.

That’s if we want to win domestic trophies, rather than have good runs in Europe. Obviously you’d prefer both, but I’ve just been thinking recently about the contrast between us and Celtic in recent years.

That’s for another thread though.
Click to expand...
Both they chances fall to Jota at Hampden and they’re both goals. That’s the difference.

We need better players than Sakala.
 
Todd said:
Both they chances fall to Jota at Hampden and they’re both goals. That’s the difference.

We need better players than Sakala.
Click to expand...
He probably does. I’d more compare Kent with Jota, seeing as their role in the squad is similar and Kent only cost slightly less.

I don’t even think Kent would be in the position to get them, to be honest
 
Sakala,
he's just an excitable boy.
It's like he gets a rush of blood to his "head" everytime there's an open goal.
Maybe he should lock himself away & crack one off in the bog before cummin' on the park like he usually does.
 
DavieM said:
The type of player you wouldn't fancy on a 1 on 1 with the keeper. Everything is just lashed at - some hit the target and some hit the car park.

Can't fault his effort but the more he has played the worse he has got which seems to be a recurring theme for our signings.
Click to expand...
Alfie is similar. Just skelps the ball as hard as he can right at the keeper.

Between these two and Kent, who is more likely to hit the corner flag than the goal, it's no wonder we struggle to score.
 
Jim Prideaux said:
He probably does. I’d more compare Kent with Jota, seeing as their role in the squad is similar and Kent only cost slightly less.

I don’t even think Kent would be in the position to get them, to be honest
Click to expand...
Kent had everything in his locker apart from goals. One of the most frustrating players I’ve seen at Rangers because he was a talented player.

It just so happened the worst part of his game was his finishing. Which wasn’t very good for us when you play a front three which requires the two inside forwards either side of the striker to chip in with goals.
 
Not good enough, simple as. He will score now and again, or better still have a wee purple patch to be swiftly followed by horror shows such as we've seen at Hampden.
 
Jim Prideaux said:
How many minutes though?

If we can, great. We’d probably make a healthy profit too, considering Burnley were willing to pay £4m last summer.

I’m just saying getting rid of him wouldn’t be my first port of call :))
Click to expand...

That would be relevant for a lot of players but when Sakala is never going to be a regular starter, I don't think it's as pertinent. There's been instances where he's came on as a sub when the other team is knackered and that's benefited him and his stats. Also his underlying xG and xA suggest there wouldn't be a huge variance for him if he played 90 minutes every week (there's a reason he doesn't).

Overall he's played 4,437 minutes. If we're limiting people to their goal contributions then Defoe previously for example played a lot less than that and contributed a lot more in numbers so it's not essential that Sakala has to have that role in the squad and we can't improve on him.

A player with very comparable goal scoring and assist stats to Sakala in similar minutes was Josh Windass (who played in a worse Rangers team). It kinda shows average stats aren't everything and just because you're outperforming some badly performing players, it doesn't mean that much.

Also it's kinda damning when our players don't have standout stats despite featuring for a team who dominate 99% of their games.
 
ah another Sakala thread

tenor.gif
 
He’s a squad player that will chip in with 10+ goals every season.

He’s no world beater but I find it laughable the stick he’s taken for missing 2 chances against that lot whilst some of the same folk will happily dismiss and airbrush even worse sitters missed by Morelos in the same fixture
 
Brian11Laudrup said:
He’s a squad player that will chip in with 10+ goals every season.

He’s no world beater but I find it laughable the stick he’s taken for missing 2 chances against that lot whilst some of the same folk will happily dismiss and airbrush even worse sitters missed by Morelos in the same fixture
Click to expand...
Neither have been good enough for celtc. It isn't one vs the other.

And he's playing a lot more than squad player. He's nowhere near good enough to be doing that for us.

His finishing is what is laughable. Well, would be if it was for anyone else other than us.
 
CAL said:
I’m more inclined to ask why he’s been here for two years with clear weaknesses without them being addressed by his various coaches.

He certainly has potential and could be a great player for us in my opinion.
Click to expand...

You can't coach a footballing into someone
 
I just can’t stomach the judging of a player solely on ‘numbers’. He’s possibly one of the worst players I’ve ever seen play for us. Little / no technical ability yet some still maintain he should be in our starting 11. Bizarre.

I struggle to get my head around the idea that someone involved in our recruitment process has watched him, then identified him as an option let alone continue to include him in a starting 11. Surely anyone with a knowledge of football can / should see how poor he is in terms of footballing ability? Hopefully he will move on but can’t see him agreeing to it.
 
Follow1996 said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1652675354631237633


Perhaps not abysmal but certainly not the standard we require. The fact we rejected a significant bid from Burnley in the summer for his services is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Love the wee guys enthusiasm and at times he can have flashes of brilliance.I wish we could coach him to calm down a bit.Unless he can get more consistency to his game he will be a squad player.
 
Jim Prideaux said:
They seemingly approached us in the summer because Kompany had been a fan of his from his time in Belgium. They would have been prepared to pay £4m, we took discussions no further as it was no where near our valuation.
Click to expand...
Oh dear, we’re really not very good at buying or selling
 
He is a lovely gentleman but we are a success based club and not a charity. Even if he does stay over the summer, I don’t think his Rangers career will recover from the LC final miss and the recent SC semi miss
 
I've took to him as a person, but FFS he misses blatant sitters, he scores the one in the LC final we win that game as we had them on the ropes, it was the same in the semi, he scores that tap in we would have been in the final as we were well on top at the time and would have got another
I've lost patience with the guy he's so frustrating to watch and needs to go
 
A reasonable player at a lower level than us. Another on the list of poor in front of goal - our lack of finishers has been a problem since Alfie decided he couldn’t be bothered with football anymore.
 
MuddyWaters said:
I've took to him as a person, but FFS he misses blatant sitters, he scores the one in the LC final we win that game as we had them on the ropes, it was the same in the semi, he scores that tap in we would have been in the final as we were well on top at the time and would have got another
I've lost patience with the guy he's so frustrating to watch and needs to go
Click to expand...

You've just described Morelos' first few years against Celtic in fairness.
 
Brutal football player, miles below our level. I like footballers who can consistently control a football, he doesn’t do that. Could not care less about his goals and assists. Football isn’t played in black and white. If you were looking at just stats sakala probably looks a better player than kent until you see both of them on a pitch.
 
RFC56 said:
Brutal football player, miles below our level. I like footballers who can consistently control a football, he doesn’t do that. Could not care less about his goals and assists. Football isn’t played in black and white. If you were looking at just stats sakala probably looks a better player than kent until you see both of them on a pitch.
Click to expand...
Footballers who look awkward while playing football probably boils my piss more than anything else.

It's like your rugby mate who you've asked to play a 5-aside game. Athletic enough to run and keep up with play but don't ask him to do anything with the ball.

Can blooter the ball and might get lucky, but more often than not its sclaffed
 
Hopefully he can be sold for a decent fee this summer. He can't be relied upon when it matters. I can see that now, couldn't a year ago.
 
He’s brutal. Fully expected him to grab a brace tomorrow now those pesky trophies are out the way; courtesy of him not being able to put the ball in an empty net from 6 yards (and of course his team mates being unable to do the basics when defending).
 
It's a composure issue. He can get into the positions - he just struggles to 'keep the heid' once he's in there. Compare and contrast to the wee mushroom-heided Jappo. He'd have buried both those chances.
 
RFC56 said:
Brutal football player, miles below our level. I like footballers who can consistently control a football, he doesn’t do that. Could not care less about his goals and assists. Football isn’t played in black and white. If you were looking at just stats sakala probably looks a better player than kent until you see both of them on a pitch.
Click to expand...

So you wouldn't rather a player who scores and assists more than another player in his same position?

The scoreline doesn't say how a goal was scored, just that it was.
 
He's frustrating.

Most of the times acts like a car chasing dog that doesn't know what to do when he has caught the car.
 
DKRangers said:
So you wouldn't rather a player who scores and assists more than another player in his same position?

The scoreline doesn't say how a goal was scored, just that it was.
Click to expand...
If you can watch both kent and sakala and say you would prefer sakala then I don’t know what your watching. It’s not football anyway.

Would you say that colak is good enough to be our no1 striker? Because his goals record suggests he can be. But when you watch him he’s clearly not a good enough player to be no1 striker.
 
RFC56 said:
If you can watch both kent and sakala and say you would prefer sakala then I don’t know what your watching. It’s not football anyway.

Would you say that colak is good enough to be our no1 striker? Because his goals record suggests he can be. But when you watch him he’s clearly not a good enough player to be no1 striker.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Sakala is a better player than Kent, but what do you think Kent offers us than Sakala doesn't, specifically the last 12-18 months?

No I don't think Colak is good enough to be our main striker. Nor do I think Sakala is good enough to be a regular starter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top